netweavr:Tatsuma: netweavr: Hypothetically, if this guy made it to Canadia, could he be extradited? I know they have rules about "no death penalty" but I really don't see them wanting to pick this fight.

For starters, he's not a citizen, so it's irrelevant. Second, Canada refusing to hand him over would create such an international incident and massive shiatstorm there is no way that would happen unless like, possibly the NDP had a majority government and they legalized crack.

Grobbley:rufus-t-firefly: Grobbley: And every single time, people get mad. If it were just "stupid bullshiat" why not simply dismiss it as such and move on? Do you know how much "stupid bullshiat" gets posted and reposted on FARK every single day? Generally people don't get so pissed off about it. The emotional responses to this "stupid bullshiat" would indicate to me that they feel their view of reality is threatened by it. People don't want to face the potential of their reality being wrong, so anything that conflicts with their reality is immediately a threat to be attacked or suppressed, regardless of how absurd it is.

/I don't personally believe any of the shiat from the image, but I do find the responses to be humorous and illuminating

Oh, so you're just trolling - posting something you don't believe because you enjoy making people mad.

The faux-psychology explanation is your own attempt to justify your trolling. It's more likely people get mad because they know exactly what you're doing.

[i2.kym-cdn.com image 500x301]

Your words, not mine:

And every single time, people get mad.

I don't personally believe any of the shiat from the image, but I do find the responses to be humorous

That's a perfect example of trolling.

The first time? No. But after you do it a few times, and get that response "every single time," yet you keep doing it because it's "humorous," you're a troll.

Tatsuma:netweavr: Hypothetically, if this guy made it to Canadia, could he be extradited? I know they have rules about "no death penalty" but I really don't see them wanting to pick this fight.

For starters, he's not a citizen, so it's irrelevant. Second, Canada refusing to hand him over would create such an international incident and massive shiatstorm there is no way that would happen unless like, possibly the NDP had a majority government and they legalized crack.

NDP gaining a majority government would certainly be a huge, international incident.

Tommy Moo:No more stories about how these two were "good kids" or how it's "so shocking" that these "peaceful" young men could commit such a strange act. There's no longer any ambiguity. These are two more people poisoned by their religion to commit the exact kind of evil that is consistent with the teachings of their holy text. They grew to hate this country because of our tolerance of homosexuality and female sexuality. They terrorized us as a favor, to scare us onto a path of righteousness that they believed would point us toward salvation. This is your brain on Islam.

Yeah, they should have just assasinated a couple of abortion doctors, like Good Christians®.

fireclown:4tehsnowflakes: Someone just sent me a purported photo of the older brother on a slab with his wounds exposed. If real, I am outraged at the violation of his post-mortem right to privacy?

That kind of thing doesn't matter when we FOR REALS don't like the guy.

Sure, fark him. But we are seeing a lot of cases now (example: the "Bad Lieutenant" white supremacist guy in the NYFD) that suggest some first responders keep and publish personal collections of photo or video of trauma victims. I find that symptomatic of a lack of regard for the civilians.

I tried to challenge the legitimacy of the police state earlier and I was basically shunned for being so callous as to imply the stay in your house rule was unconstitutional, and that during a crisis you should just do what your told.

ariseatex:Tommy Moo: No more stories about how these two were "good kids" or how it's "so shocking" that these "peaceful" young men could commit such a strange act. There's no longer any ambiguity. These are two more people poisoned by their religion to commit the exact kind of evil that is consistent with the teachings of their holy text. They grew to hate this country because of our tolerance of homosexuality and female sexuality. They terrorized us as a favor, to scare us onto a path of righteousness that they believed would point us toward salvation. This is your brain on Islam.

For someone raised to hate this country and our tolerance of female sexuality, he sure has his hands pretty far up that girl's torso on the prom pic going around.

That is probably as close as he got to those titties, that is why he hated female sexuality.

If that girl would have let him titty fark those titties, this whole thing may have been prevented. How would you like to go through life knowing that you may have been able to prevent a massacre if you would have let him titty fark.

fireclown:bowtiesheep: hutchkc: Abzzstain: So the police get a free pass to barge in without a search warrant and toss every farking house in Boston if they want. If you're not home they'll let themselves in.

I realize they've got to find the guy, but this seems like overkill and not exactly constitutional. I suspect police all over the country will be using this convenient tactic now whenever there's a fugitive.

If they are searching house to house, they knock on the door and ask to search. The people are allowing it. The cop casually walks through your house just to see if there is someone there. Had that happen a couple times. They spend all of like 2 minutes in your house. Not unconstitutional and they don't care about jack shiat except the person they are looking for. The first time it happened I was at my neighbors and his roommate was smoking a <b>bowel</b> when they went through. Not a word about it.

Hands-down nastiest thing I've heard in the last hour

What if you say "no"?

They leave a couple of cops at your house house to watch to make sure you're not just being held hostage.

Tatsuma:netweavr: Hypothetically, if this guy made it to Canadia, could he be extradited? I know they have rules about "no death penalty" but I really don't see them wanting to pick this fight.

For starters, he's not a citizen, so it's irrelevant. Second, Canada refusing to hand him over would create such an international incident and massive shiatstorm there is no way that would happen unless like, possibly the NDP had a majority government and they legalized crack.

Tatsuma:ShawnDoc: The original containment zone was only 2 blocks in each direction, and then they expanded to 4. So as long as he ran straight, he was well out of the zone by the time they actually got it setup, and they delayed setting it up because they were busy making that one guy get naked in the middle of the road.

Pretty much, I think that at this point he might be just three four states away

Since your accuracy this week is comparable to CNN's, the smart bet would be to say the cops will find him in Watertown very soon - if they haven't already found him.

FinFangFark:So is the consensus in the thread that he broke the perimeter a long time ago?

My guess is he's long gone, or he was injured last night and is dead. It seems that nobody has any idea where he is.

I agree with people that I question the legality of the "lockdown" in the city (that word used to exclusively be used in prisons, not schools and now entire neighborhoods and towns) as well as the police entering homes if people did not answer the door or did not consent to a search. I believe they need to catch the suspect in this case, but not at <i>any</i> cost -- especially at the cost of our freedoms -- which is what they seem to be doing.

fireclown:bowtiesheep: hutchkc: Abzzstain: So the police get a free pass to barge in without a search warrant and toss every farking house in Boston if they want. If you're not home they'll let themselves in.

I realize they've got to find the guy, but this seems like overkill and not exactly constitutional. I suspect police all over the country will be using this convenient tactic now whenever there's a fugitive.

If they are searching house to house, they knock on the door and ask to search. The people are allowing it. The cop casually walks through your house just to see if there is someone there. Had that happen a couple times. They spend all of like 2 minutes in your house. Not unconstitutional and they don't care about jack shiat except the person they are looking for. The first time it happened I was at my neighbors and his roommate was smoking a <b>bowel</b> when they went through. Not a word about it.

Hands-down nastiest thing I've heard in the last hour

What if you say "no"?

If you say no you'd damn well not better have been smoking a bowl when they knock.

lennavan:drdstny: The gun show loophole essentially amounts to private citizens doing PPT / P2P (private party / person to person) transactions. You see these all the time at gun shows: people "wear" their guns with a sign on it that says what they want (cash or trade). Since there's nothing stopping one consenting party from looking the other way while another consenting party hands over money, THAT is the loophole. THAT is the problem. Responsible gun dealers won't look the other way, if for no other reason than to account for the serial number of the gun being sold.

There is also nothing stopping gun dealers (not random people wearing their guns with a sign) from looking the other way. THAT also is the loophole. Yes, "responsible" gun dealers won't look the other way. Duh, by definition you called them "responsible." There are also plenty of "irresponsible" gun dealers who don't even bother asking if you're even from that state, let alone whether you're allowed to purchase guns, are a felon, what your name is to track purchases with the serial number and so on.

Doesn't that make it more of a "private seller"/"Irresponsible gun dealer" loophole, not a "Gun Show" loophole? I mean, the private seller could sell the guns at their house, and the Irresponsible dealer is also probably Irresponsible at their own store. About the only thing is the "convenience" the gun show brings.

FinFangFark:So is the consensus in the thread that he broke the perimeter a long time ago?

I suggested it in a thread around 7am. They've been chasing shadows, raccoons, random open doors and every idiot in Boston that's stupid enough to walk around wearing hoodies and backpacks on a day when there's a citywide APB for males wearing hoodies and backpacks.

MaliFinn:OgreMagi: llachlan: the DC sniper who terrorized that city was also an American, non-Muslim

He was an American and Muslim. For some reason the news media and law enforcement downplayed that.

Because his group memberhsips didn't really matter.

It didn't? From his trial:

Exhibit 65-006: A self-portrait of Malvo in the cross hairs of a gun scope shouting, "ALLAH AKBAR!" The word "SALAAM" scrawled vertically. A lyric from Bob Marley's Natural Mystic "Many more will have to suffer. Many more will have to die. Don't ask me why."Exhibit 65-016: A portrait of Saddam Hussein with the words "INSHALLAH" and "The Protector," surrounded by rockets labeledExhibit 65-043: Father and son portrait of Malvo and Muhammad. "We will kill them all. Jihad."Exhibit 65-056: A self-portrait of Malvo as sniper, lying in wait, with his rifle. "JIHAD" written in bold letters.Exhibit 65-067: A suicide bomber labeled "Hamas" walking into a McDonald's restaurant. Another drawing of the Twin Towers burning captioned: "85 percent chance Zionists did this." More scrawls: "ALLAH AKBAR," "JIHAD" and "Islam will explode."Exhibit 65-103: A lion accompanies chapter and verse from the Koran (Sura 2:190): "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you and slay them wherever ye catch them."Exhibit 65-109: Portrait of Osama bin Laden, captioned "Servant of Allah."Exhibit 65-117: The White House drawn in crosshairs, surrounded by missiles, with a warning: "Sep. 11 we will ensure will look like a picnic to you" and "you will bleed to death little by little."Exhibit 65-101: Malvo's thought for the day: "Islam the only true guidance, the way of peace."

No, I don't believe all muslims are terrorists. I believe the vast majority are peaceful people who I would not mind as neighbors. Also, note the contradiction of the last exhibit with his actions.

dletter:serpent_sky: vento: How in the heck do you not have a day or two worth of food in your house?

It's Friday, payday for a lot of people. I've been known to have next to nothing in the house -- certainly not a few days worth of meals - on the day before/day of payday. I'm sure that's not incredibly rare since most people structure their lives around when they get paid, and usually do the shopping on those days.

I always refill my medicine on a Tuesday, for example, because I get paid on Tuesdays and that's when I have the money I need for my prescriptions. I also grocery shop on Tuesdays.

Also I knew way too many people when I was in my early 20s who basically had nothing in the house foodwise, other than maybe a few snacks.. ate all fast food for meals.

Well given everything that's happened in the last 15 years, maybe you ought to keep, I don't know, a bag a rice and a couple cans of soup in the house?

muck4doo:Nina_Hartley's_Ass: muck4doo: I'm gonna get out of here. What i don't understand is how evil people sacrifice our young people for their ideals. Kids who haven't had time to weigh things out in their own minds. We do it today, and we have done it for thousands of years. The elders make the cause for death and murder, then make the young carry it out while keeping themselves out of the battle.

Lanza?

Just convinced that for kids who do these kinds of things there are older adults that trained them to think that way, and then slink away in the background like cowards and let the kids fight for their fantasies.

LAST TIME, people: Background checks are not permission, they are rejection. Put another way: a background check would not stop an immigrant with a state-provided ID, but a law-abiding citizen named John Wilkes Booth would be told to wait 7 days while they look into it further.

There's nothing WRONG with a background check, but it's not magic, either. It's still not enough to stop a first-time buyer with no criminal record who never reported the side-effects of a recent Cymbalta prescription.

According to the website spotcrime.com, Tamerlan was arrested for domestic violence in July 2009 after assaulting his girlfriend.

Okay, presuming it resulted in a conviction, that would probably prevent him from passing a background check. Now how about his brother?

His NINETEEN year old brother?

Age 18 for a long gun in Massachusetts.

Is that what he has?

Per the cops last night, yes. Until they killed a cop and took his gun.

I guess we'll find out where he got it.

Yep. But last week, he was just a guy. He could have bought it legally in Massachusetts with a full background check. So the "background check would have stopped this" claim is dead on arrival, not to mention they have homemade bombs.

So you think Tamerlan should have been allowed to buy?

Tamerlan is the older brother with the domestic violence count, if he has a conviction then no. As for Dzhokar, again, what criteria would you have used to disallow him before this week? The fact that he's Islamic? An immigrant? You don't like his looks? Or your super special crystal ball that you didn't use to prevent the bombings?

I tried to challenge the legitimacy of the police state earlier and I was basically shunned for being so callous as to imply the stay in your house rule was unconstitutional, and that during a crisis you should just do what your told.

So it goes.

Plain and simply it is not a police state. It is a request at this time, that is all.

lennavan:drdstny: The gun show loophole essentially amounts to private citizens doing PPT / P2P (private party / person to person) transactions. You see these all the time at gun shows: people "wear" their guns with a sign on it that says what they want (cash or trade). Since there's nothing stopping one consenting party from looking the other way while another consenting party hands over money, THAT is the loophole. THAT is the problem. Responsible gun dealers won't look the other way, if for no other reason than to account for the serial number of the gun being sold.

There is also nothing stopping gun dealers (not random people wearing their guns with a sign) from looking the other way. THAT also is the loophole. Yes, "responsible" gun dealers won't look the other way. Duh, by definition you called them "responsible." There are also plenty of "irresponsible" gun dealers who don't even bother asking if you're even from that state, let alone whether you're allowed to purchase guns, are a felon, what your name is to track purchases with the serial number and so on.

Federally licensed firearm sellers who transfer firearms without conducting a background investigation of the transferee are violating federal law. Please explain an additional law that would physically restrain such a violation of law.

OgreMagi:I guess it's past due for me to admit my guess was wrong. I had gone with the "lone nutjob with a political manifesto the reads like it was written by a drunk teenager." I was most definitely wrong.

So when will all the idiots who immediately jumped on the "teabagger" bandwagon going to admit they were wrong?

Probably on the same day as all of the "teabaggers" who think every single on of the world's 1.6 Billion Muslims are terrorists.

/Maybe the day after that.//Day after the day after that at the latest...